(ProQuest: ... denotes non-USASCII text omitted.) In contemporary society one can observe an apparent collapse of opposition between technology on one hand and nature on other, an opposition which has been constitutive for modern understanding of both nature and technology. It is claimed that this collapse, epitomized in neologism biotechnology and in rise of concept of so-called self-organizing systems, suggests that we have entered a radically new stage of being, not only technologically, but also with respect to status of human. Specifically, it is argued that as a consequence of this radically changed conception of relation between natural and artificial, figure of human, crux as it were of modern opposition between physis and techne, is dispensed with, possibly even overcome, in effect leading us towards a posthuman form of existence.1 This essay will examine latter claim in light of way nature, and human body in particular, has been understood conceptually and historically in technological terms, particularly with reference to technological artefacts. Against view presented above I will argue that transition taking place from modern-humanist to contemporary posthuman paradigm is not so much a rupture bringing about replacement of an old paradigm with a radically different new one but a modified perpetuation of old that involves an intensification of a kind of thinking that is both anthropomorphic and anthropocentric. The investigation is structured as follows: first, I briefly summarize main features of what I take to be modern paradigm of technology and shed some light on its underlying anthropologism. Particular attention will be devoted to modern paradigm's conceptual treatment of human body, and to archetypical artefacts which in a metaphorical way render body's functioning. Secondly, I will describe what I will term hyper-modern stage of technological development, its connection to ideology of self-organizing system and more broadly to notion of post-human. Again, particular attention will be paid to role human body plays in conceptual formation of a technological post-human paradigm and to body's relation to artefacts on pattern of which it is modelled. Thirdly, drawing on Maurice Merleau-Ponty's critique of cybernetic project, I will show how far this hypermodern paradigm, and idea of posthuman more generally, gives further impetus to anthropomorphic and anthropocentric tendencies inherent in classic modern paradigm of technology in spite of radical changes it seemingly brings with it. Drawing on analysis from all three groups of considerations, I will finish with some general comments about reciprocal constitution of notions of man and technology, arguing that technology always already functions quasi-transcendentally in constitution of figure of man, thus foreclosing possibility of any straightforward technological move towards posthuman. The Modern Humanist Understanding of Technology: The Body as Clock Roughly speaking, modern conception of technology-leaving aside important constitutive role of its Ancient and Medieval precursors-takes shape during sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The very idea of technical is based on three interrelated processes: firstly, exteriorization or objectification of nature, secondly, its mechanization, and thirdly, its quantification. All three processes, which are given paradigmatic philosophical form in work of Descartes, are a result of a constitutive gap opening up between a disembodied, rational subject on one hand and a rationalized, objective material world on other. Already inherent in double signification of Latin ratio, which tellingly combines aspects of both calculation and rationality as Cassirer reminds us,2 this rationalistic conceptual constellation can be regarded as product of a twofold process of purification: rupture between subject and world is what underlies both the transparency of an object with no secret recesses, and the transparency of a subject which is nothing but what it thinks it is. …
Read full abstract